When Ian Thomson moved into
his home in rural Port Colborne, Ontario, he quickly learned that he
had the proverbial "neighbour from hell," a man with a long
criminal record and considerable jail time in his past. Thomson had
to call the police on numerous occasions when articles of his property
went missing and death threats were made against him. To ensure his
safety, he installed several surveillance cameras around his house.

One morning in August, 2010
Thomson awoke to find intruders firebombing his house. To see portions
of the surveillance videos, click here.

For more details on the attack,
here's what I wrote about this case in the Calgary Herald:

As an experienced firearms
instructor, Thomson knew what he had to do. He got his gun out of the
safe where it was stored and scared the men off his property by firing
over their heads.

Thomson was initially charged
with four offences, but two of those (careless use of a firearm and
pointing a firearm) were dropped by the Crown when it became obvious
that his self-defence argument would succeed. The remaining charges,
of unsafe storage of his firearm and ammunition, went to trial. A decision
was rendered by Justice Colvin on January 3, 2013. Thomson was found
not guilty.

However, his problems may
not yet be over. The Crown apparently said even before the decision
was rendered that if Thomson were not convicted, the Crown would appeal.
It seems the Crown wants Thomson to go to jail for storing his gun and
his ammunition in the manner necessary to save his life.

Meanwhile, the four intruders
recently pleaded guilty under s. 433 of the Criminal Code ("Arson
-- disregard to human life"), an offence which carries a maximum
penalty of life imprisonment. Two of them got sentences of two years.
A third man got sentenced to three years. The fourth man -- the one
who can be heard in the surveillance video shouting, "Are you prepared
to die?" was sentenced to two years on top of the 29 months he
has already spent in jail.

Is it just me, or do those
sentences seem wildly disproportionate (i.e. far too lenient) when compared
to the Crown's insistence that the victim himself should go to jail
for the allegedly unsafe storage of his ammo?